Monthly Archives: August 2013

“A category of mortgages known as low-documentation or no-documentation mortgages that have been abused to the point where the loans are sometimes referred to as liar loans. On certain low-documentation loan programs, such as stated income/stated asset (SISA) loans, income and assets are simply stated on the loan application. On other loan programs, such as no income/no asset (NINA) loans, no income and assets are given on the loan application form. These loan programs open the door for unethical behavior by unscrupulous borrowers and lenders.”

By “simply stated,” Investopedia means that, even though I might earn just $20,000 per year, I could walk into bank, “simply state” that I earned $50,000 per year and the bank would take my word as true without verifying my income. The bank would then issue a mortgage for a house appropriate for a $50,000 annual income rather than a $20,000 annual income. Because the bank wouldn’t bother to verify my income, I’d be free lie about my income and therefore move into a house that was perhaps twice as large as a house that I could actually afford.

Here’s an informative video that explains the risks inherent in banking with some of America’s biggest and most aggressive banks. The video does not allege that all banks are likely to file for bankruptcy. But it does suggest that the nation’s biggest banks (like Bank of America, JP Morgan, etc.) are so deeply ensnared by their “investments” in derivatives, that their bankruptcies are least possible, and perhaps inevitable.

In the event of such bankruptcies, bank customers will lose some or all of their deposits.

The video focuses on the risks associated with the biggest American banks. However, we can also speculate that if one or more of the biggest banks collapse, the financial consequences might be so “contagious” that the entire banking system (including local banks that are otherwise solvent) might also be temporarily paralyzed. If so, all depositors might be unable to access their funds for several days or weeks.

What do you suppose would happen to his country if the banking system was effectively shut down for just one week? No credit cards, no debit cards, no checks, no ATM or bank withdrawals. People would have to live for a week on just the cash they had in their hands or had squirreled away in their homes.

We could survive a week of such inconvenience, but it wouldn’t be fun. If the “inconvenience” lasted for several weeks or months, there’d be chaos.

The video concludes by suggesting that, in order to protect our deposits, every community should establish a new kind of local bank that keeps local depositors’ funds in the local community and prevents placing those funds into distant or foreign investment vehicles. That’s an interesting idea, but unlikely to be implemented in the near future.

I suggest that you: 1) consider how vulnerable some of our major banks are to bankruptcy; 2) decide how much of your wealth you’re prepared to risk in the American banking system; and 3) decide how much of your wealth that you’d like to protect by keeping it in or near your homes in the forms of cash, gold or silver.

I’m not suggesting that you close your bank accounts. I am suggesting that you keep a secret “stash” close to home in a form of money (cash, gold, silver) that could get you through several weeks or months of a banking collapse. These suggestions can be implemented immediately.

“Pennsylvania police chief Mark Kessler is approaching the last day of his suspension from duty on Friday after he posted videos of pro-gun rants on YouTube. Technically he was suspended for unauthorized use of a weapon, but the vitriol of his speech has attracted as much attention as the guns themselves.”

I’m delighted to see anyone–especially in law enforcement–who is as passionate as police chief Kessler about defending our right to keep and bear arms against our own government and the United Nations.

The language in the video is “salty” and it’s not for kids. But he makes his point. He’s not debating. He’s ready to fight, and I say “Applause, Applause!” 50,000 more men like police chief Kessler and we just might be able to take this country back.

video 00:01:34

Some viewers complained about Chief Kessler’s use of profanity in his first video, so he apologized in his second video. Kinda.

In fact, where the first video had some political content, this second video includes a lot of gratuitous profanity. It’s absolutely not for the kids. But, even though Chief Kessler swears like a longshoreman, he again makes his point. The man’s ready to go.

“Congress shall have Power . . . to declare war . . . .”–Article I.8.11 The Constitution of the United States.

So I’m wondering . . . if Congress doesn’t expressly declare a war, but the United States government nevertheless attacks Syria, would that attack still constitute an act of war–or would it actually be an act of terrorism?

• During the 1990s, the U.S. imposed an embargo on Iraq to prevent that nation from receiving all of the food and medicines it needed. As a result of that embargo, 500,000 Iraqi children are believed to have died.

During much of that embargo, Medeline Albright was the 64th U.S. Secretary of State. On May 12th, A.D. 1996, Secretary of State Albright appeared on 60 Minutes and was asked if the “price” of the embargo-related deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children was “worth it”. Albright replied, “I think that this is a very hard choice, but the price . . . we think the price is worth it.” (See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4)

Can anyone in their right mind justify the needless deaths of one-half million children? Can anyone who causes or even justifies the deaths of one-half million children expect to be forgiven and welcomed to salvation? Shouldn’t Americans and the world have been shocked and appalled by Secretary of State Albright’s admissions? Could America cause the deaths of 500,000 children and still claim to be the “good guys”?

The Washington Times recently published an article entitled “China will surpass U.S. in oil imports; shift in supply and demand could transform geopolitics.” According to that article,

“China will become the world’s largest importer of crude oil in October, surpassing the U.S. for the first time as the Asian giant’s rising consumer class of drivers grows increasingly thirsty for fuel, the U.S. Energy Information Administration is projecting.

“China already is the largest importer of oil from the troubled Middle East, taking away a distinction that plagued the U.S. since the 1970s. Its ascendance as the world’s largest importer—even as U.S. dependence on Middle Eastern oil declines to negligible levels—could transform regional and world politics as the focus of global defense efforts for decades has been keeping open the vital oil shipping lanes leading from the Persian Gulf.”